Showing papers in "Journal of Quantitative Criminology in 2010"
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors used growth curve regression models to uncover distinctive developmental trends in gun assault incidents at street segments and intersections in Boston over a 29-year period, and found that Boston gun violence is intensely concentrated at a small number of street segments, rather than spread evenly across the urban landscape between 1980 and 2008.
Abstract: Boston, like many other major U.S. cities, experienced an epidemic of gun violence during the late 1980s and early 1990s that was followed by a sudden large downturn in gun violence in the mid 1990s. The gun violence drop continued until the early part of the new millennium. Recent advances in criminological research suggest that there is significant clustering of crime in micro places, or “hot spots,” that generate a disproportionate amount of criminal events in a city. In this paper, we use growth curve regression models to uncover distinctive developmental trends in gun assault incidents at street segments and intersections in Boston over a 29-year period. We find that Boston gun violence is intensely concentrated at a small number of street segments and intersections rather than spread evenly across the urban landscape between 1980 and 2008. Gun violence trends at these high-activity micro places follow two general trajectories: stable concentrations of gun assaults incidents over time and volatile concentrations of gun assault incidents over time. Micro places with volatile trajectories represent less than 3% of street segments and intersections, generate more than half of all gun violence incidents, and seem to be the primary drivers of overall gun violence trends in Boston. Our findings suggest that the urban gun violence epidemic, and sudden downturn in urban gun violence in the late 1990s, may be best understood by examining highly volatile micro-level trends at a relatively small number of places in urban environments.
361 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors examined both temporal and spatial variation in crime across street blocks in the city of Seattle Washington, and established whether streets having the same temporal trajectory are collocated spatially or whether there is street to street variation in the temporal patterns of crime.
Abstract: Over the last 40 years, the question of how crime varies across places has gotten greater attention. At the same time, as data and computing power have increased, the definition of a ‘place’ has shifted farther down the geographic cone of resolution. This has led many researchers to consider places as small as single addresses, group of addresses, face blocks or street blocks. Both cross-sectional and longitudinal studies of the spatial distribution of crime have consistently found crime is strongly concentrated at a small group of ‘micro’ places. Recent longitudinal studies have also revealed crime concentration across micro places is relatively stable over time. A major question that has not been answered in prior research is the degree of block to block variability at this local ‘micro’ level for all crime. To answer this question, we examine both temporal and spatial variation in crime across street blocks in the city of Seattle Washington. This is accomplished by applying trajectory analysis to establish groups of places that follow similar crime trajectories over 16 years. Then, using quantitative spatial statistics, we establish whether streets having the same temporal trajectory are collocated spatially or whether there is street to street variation in the temporal patterns of crime. In a surprising number of cases we find that individual street segments have trajectories which are unrelated to their immediately adjacent streets. This finding of heterogeneity suggests it may be particularly important to examine crime trends at very local geographic levels. At a policy level, our research reinforces the importance of initiatives like ‘hot spots policing’ which address specific streets within relatively small areas.
292 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the role of the permeability of the street network on the location of crime is examined at the street segment level and it is shown that increased permeability is associated with elevated burglary risk, that burglary risk is lower on cul-de-sacs (particularly those that are sinuous in nature), and that the risk of burglary is higher on more major roads and those street segments that are connected to them.
Abstract: That crime is concentrated in space is now accepted as commonplace. Explanations for why it clusters at particular locations are various reflecting the range of factors which are held to influence crime placement. In this article, we focus on the role of the permeability of the street network on the location of crime. We first review the research conducted hitherto, summarising the different approaches to analysis and the findings that have so far emerged. Then we present original analyses conducted at the street segment level to examine the issues at hand. In contrast to much of the prior research, in this study we examine the patterns for a large study area in which there is considerable variation in street network configuration. Moreover, and in contrast to all of the previous research, the approach to analysis takes into account the multi-level structure of the data analysed. The findings demonstrate that increased permeability is associated with elevated burglary risk, that burglary risk is lower on cul-de-sacs (particularly those that are sinuous in nature), and that the risk of burglary is higher on more major roads and those street segments that are connected to them. In the conclusion of the paper we outline an agenda for future research.
209 citations
TL;DR: The analysis is based on the classic dataset assembled by Farrington and West (1990), which includes data on convictions from age 10 to 32 in a sample of over 400 males from a poor neighborhood in London, England.
Abstract: The Author(s) 2010 This article is published with open access at Springerlinkcom Nearly two decades have passed since the publication of ‘‘Age, Criminal Careers, and Population Heterogeneity: Specification and Estimation of a Nonparametric Mixed Poisson Model’’ by Nagin and Land (1993) In that article Nagin and Land laid out a statistical method that has come to be called group-based trajectory modeling The principle objective of the paper was to address issues related to the ‘‘hot topic’’ of the time—the criminal career debate—not to lay out a new statistical methodology As described in the paper’s abstract, these issues were: ‘‘First, is the life course of individual offending patterns marked by distinctive periods of quiescence? Second, at the level of the individual, do offending rates vary systematically with age? In particular, is the age-crime curve single peaked or flat? Third, are chronic offenders different from less active offenders? Do offenders themselves differ in systematic ways?’’ Figure 1 reports Nagin’s (2005) updated version of the trajectories reported in Nagin and Land (1993) The analysis is based on the classic dataset assembled by Farrington and West (1990), which includes data on convictions from age 10 to 32 in a sample of over 400 males from a poor neighborhood in London, England A four group model, analyzed using the zero-inflated Poisson modeling option, was found to best fit the data The largest trajectory group accounted for 695% of the population, and was composed of individuals who generally had no convictions The three offending trajectories included an adolescentlimited group (124% of the population), which peaked sharply in late adolescence, and then declined to a near zero rate of offending by age 20, a high chronic trajectory (59% of the population) with a high-humped shaped trajectory and a low rate chronic trajectory that accounted for the remaining 122% of the population Also, shown in the figure are 95% confidence intervals around each trajectory The dominant legacy of Nagin and Land (1993), however, was not its answers to the specific questions listed in the abstract but the methodology itself A review of applications
204 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the role of the social environment, particularly the person and place interaction, in crime causation has been investigated using data from the ESRC financed Peterborough Adolescent and Young Adult Development Study (PADS+).
Abstract: Our current understanding of the role of the social environment in crime causation is at best rudimentary Guided by the theoretical framework of Situational Action Theory, and using data from the ESRC financed Peterborough Adolescent and Young Adult Development Study (PADS+), this paper aims to propose how we can better theorise and study the role of the social environment, particularly the person and place interaction, in crime causation We will introduce, and illustrate the usefulness of, a space–time budget methodology as a means of capturing people’s exposure to settings and describing their activity fields We will suggest and demonstrate that, combined with a small area community survey and psychometric measures of individual characteristics, a space–time budget is a powerful tool for advancing our knowledge about the role of the social environment, and its interaction with people’s crime propensity, in crime causation Our unique data allows us to study the convergence in time and space of crime propensity, criminogenic exposure and crime events As far as we are aware, such an analysis has never before been carried out The findings show that there are (a) clear associations between young people’s activity fields and their exposure to criminogenic settings, (b) clear associations between their exposure to criminogenic settings and their crime involvement, and, crucially, (c) that the influence of criminogenic exposure depends on a person’s crime propensity Having a crime-averse morality and strong ability to exercise self-control appears to make young people practically situationally immune to the influences of criminogenic settings, while having a crime-prone morality and poor ability to exercise self-control appears to make young people situationally vulnerable to the influences of criminogenic settings
188 citations
TL;DR: Criminology has experienced a distinct ‘‘experimental turn.’’ The sheer number of quantitative experiments in criminology was increased dramatically in recent decades, accompanied by an influential and institutionalized movement to promote experiments as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: Criminology has experienced a distinct ‘‘experimental turn.’’ The sheer number of quantitative experiments in criminology has increased dramatically in recent decades, accompanied by an influential and institutionalized movement to promote experiments. Evidence of this turn is seen in our journals, funding trends, scholarly awards, proclamations by governmental agencies like the Office of Justice Programs, the emergence of new scholarly divisions in the American Society of Criminology, and separate societies such as the Academy of Experimental Criminology. The claims for experimental methods have not been modest. Among other things, experiments have been argued to enhance scientific quality, evidence-based policy, causal inference, and even liberty. Criminology is by no means alone in its experimental zeal. Angus Deaton, the former President of the American Economic Association, recently coined the term randomistas to describe those economists convinced that adopting the paradigm of the randomized clinical trial (RCT) was the best hope for scientific progress. Claims to superiority are in some sense unsurprising. After all, the common reference to experiments as the ‘‘gold standard’’ quite explicitly invokes a sense of hierarchical or superior knowledge (Cartwright 2007). Observational methods have apparently been shown their lower station in life.
171 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the reciprocal relationship between violent crime and residential stability in neighborhoods was examined, and the effect of instability on violent crime was only apparent when measuring instability based on an index of general residential turnover and not when including the presence of owners in this measure, or when measuring it based on homeowner turnover.
Abstract: This study examines the reciprocal relationship between violent crime and residential stability in neighborhoods. We test whether the form of stability matters by comparing two different measures of stability: a traditional index of residential stability and a novel approach focusing specifically on the stability of homeowners. We also examine whether the racial/ethnic composition of the neighborhood in which this stability occurs affects the instability—violent crime relationship. To test the simultaneous relationship between residential mobility and crime we estimate a dual multivariate latent curve model of the change in the violent crime rate and the change in the rate of home sales while controlling for neighborhood socioeconomic and demographic characteristics using data from Los Angeles between 1992 and 1997. Results indicate that the initial level of violent crime increases the trajectory of residential instability in subsequent years, whether the instability is measured as homeowner turnover specifically, or based on an index of all residents. However, the effect of instability on violent crime is only apparent when measuring instability based on an index of general residential turnover and not when including the presence of owners in this measure, or when measuring it based on homeowner turnover. We consistently find that stable highly Latino communities exhibit a protective effect against violence.
144 citations
TL;DR: This article used a long-term study of a conviction cohort in The Netherlands to ascertain the effect that first-time imprisonment has on the likelihood of marriage and divorce, and found that the effect of imprisonment on marriage is largely a selection artifact, although there is very weak evidence for a short-lived impact that does not persist past the first year post-release.
Abstract: Marriage has a prominent place in criminological theory and research as one institution that has the potential to genuinely foster desistance from a criminal career. Mass imprisonment policies in the United States and elsewhere, therefore, pose a potential threat of increased crime if they impede the ability of ex-prisoners to reintegrate into society by stigmatizing them and limiting their chances in the marriage market. We use a long-term study of a conviction cohort in The Netherlands to ascertain the effect that first-time imprisonment has on the likelihood of marriage and divorce. The results suggest that the effect of imprisonment on the likelihood of marriage (among unmarried offenders) is largely a selection artifact, although there is very weak evidence for a short-lived impact that does not persist past the first year post-release. This is interpreted as a residual incapacitation effect. On the other hand, the results strongly suggest that the experience of incarceration leads to a substantially higher divorce risk among offenders who are married when they enter prison.
129 citations
TL;DR: The selective nature of arrest and imprisonment make these statistics an inadequate source of information regarding the characteristics of criminals, but it is difficult to develop statistics regarding criminals who are not recorded in some manner as discussed by the authors, therefore, the best that can be done at present is to recognize the bias in the statistics of arrests or of prisons and attempt to secure statistics in other ways regarding the classes which are not adequately represented.
Abstract: IntroductionAfter introducing several types of offenses and offenders that typically fell out of the province of official police or court data on crime, Edwin Sutherland stated the following in his 1934 criminology text:The selective nature of arrest and of imprisonment make these statistics an inadequate source of information regarding the characteristics of criminals, but it is difficult to develop statistics regarding criminals who are not recorded in some manner. Apparently, therefore, the best that can be done at present is to recognize the bias in the statistics of arrests or of prisons and attempt to secure statistics in other ways regarding the classes which are not adequately represented. (1934: 39)He further recognized, however, that these "specialized statistical studies" were "still in a primitive stage, the units are not adequately defined and they are confined to the characteristics at a particular time and have little value in showing the process by which crime develops"... Language: en
116 citations
TL;DR: This article examined different dimensions of minority threat and explored whether they exert differential effects on prison versus jail sentences, and found support for the racial threat perspective, and less support for ethnic threat perspective.
Abstract: Prior studies of criminal sanctioning have focused almost exclusively on individual-level predictors of sentencing outcomes. However, in recent years, scholars have begun to include social context in their research. Building off of this work—and heeding calls for testing the racial and ethnic minority threat perspective within a multilevel framework and for separating prison and jail sentences as distinct outcomes—this paper examines different dimensions of minority threat and explores whether they exert differential effects on prison versus jail sentences. The findings provide support for the racial threat perspective, and less support for the ethnic threat perspective. They also underscore the importance of testing for non-linear threat effects and for separating jail and prison sentences as distinct outcomes. We discuss the findings and their implications for theory, research, and policy.
106 citations
TL;DR: This paper examines a variety of model selection procedures routinely undertaken followed by statistical tests and confidence intervals computed for a “final” model in criminology and shows how they are typically misguided.
Abstract: Conventional statistical inference requires that a model of how the data were generated be known before the data are analyzed. Yet in criminology, and in the social sciences more broadly, a variety of model selection procedures are routinely undertaken followed by statistical tests and confidence intervals computed for a “final” model. In this paper, we examine such practices and show how they are typically misguided. The parameters being estimated are no longer well defined, and post-model-selection sampling distributions are mixtures with properties that are very different from what is conventionally assumed. Confidence intervals and statistical tests do not perform as they should. We examine in some detail the specific mechanisms responsible. We also offer some suggestions for better practice and show though a criminal justice example using real data how proper statistical inference in principle may be obtained.
TL;DR: The authors analyzed burglary location choice data from the Netherlands with discrete choice models, including the spatial competition model, and argued that small spatial units depend strongly on their environment, and models are needed that take into account spatial interdependence.
Abstract: Discrete choice recently emerged as a new framework for analyzing criminal location decisions, but has thus far only been used to study the choice amongst large areas like census tracts. Because offenders also make target selection decisions at much lower levels of spatial aggregation, the present study analyzes the location choices of offenders at detailed spatial resolutions: the average unit of analysis is an area of only 18 residential units and 40 residents. This article reviews the discrete choice and spatial choice literature, justifies the use of geographic units this small, and argues that because small spatial units depend strongly on their environment, models are needed that take into account spatial interdependence. To illustrate these points, burglary location choice data from the Netherlands are analyzed with discrete choice models, including the spatial competition model.
TL;DR: The authors explored the longitudinal relationship between disorder and violence and found that disorder, just like crime, concentrates in a few hot spots and that having high levels of disorder predicts having violence problems only about 30% of the time.
Abstract: The relationship between disorder and violence has generated much debate in the field of criminology. While advocates of the broken windows thesis believe disorder is the root cause of crime, other researchers view both disorder and crime as analogous behaviors resulting from the breakdown of collective efficacy. Scholars from both sides of this debate, however, assume a long-term correlation between disorder and crime at places. This assumption has not been tested with a longitudinal dataset at a relatively small geographic unit of analysis. The current study used data collected in Seattle, Washington and utilized Group-based Trajectory Analysis and Joint Trajectory Analysis to explore the longitudinal relationship between disorder and violence. The results showed that disorder, just like crime, concentrates in a few “hot spots.” Additionally, the results showed that while the lack of disorder problems guarantees places to be violence free, having high levels of disorder predicts having violence problems only about 30% of time. As such, these findings point out the need for future theorization efforts on the disorder-violence nexus to include contextual factors which could explain this imperfect association between the two.
TL;DR: In this article, the authors assess the potential impact of the nationally implemented Project Safe Neighborhoods (PSN) initiative through an analysis of violent crime trends in all US cities with a population of 100,000 or above.
Abstract: Since the mid-1990s, a number of initiatives intended to address gang, gun and drug-related violence have arisen and demonstrated promise in reducing levels of violent crime. These initiatives have employed some combination of focused deterrence and problem-solving processes. These strategies formed the basis for Project Safe Neighborhoods (PSN), a national program implemented by the Department of Justice and coordinated by US Attorneys’ Offices. This paper is an initial attempt to assess the potential impact of the nationally implemented PSN initiative through an analysis of violent crime trends in all US cities with a population of 100,000 or above. While a number of site specific studies exist examining the potential impact of locally implemented PSN programs, to date no national-level study has examined whether PSN may have had an impact on violent crime trends. Cities included in the current study are distinguished on the basis of whether they were considered a treatment city by the PSN task force and by the level of implementation dosage of the PSN program. This allowed a comparison of 82 treatment cities and 170 non-treatment cities as well as a variable of dosage level. Hierarchical Generalized Linear Models (HGLM) were developed that controlled for other factors that may have affected the level of violent crime across the sample of cities. The results suggested that PSN treatment cities in higher dosage contexts experienced statistically significant, though modest, declines in violent crime whereas non-target cities and low dosage contexts experienced no significant changes in violent crime during the same period. The limitations of this initial analysis are noted but the evidence seems to suggest that the multi-agency, focused deterrence, problem solving approach holds promise for reducing levels of violent crime. At a minimum, these findings call for continued programmatic experimentation with data-driven, highly focused, deterrence-based violence reduction strategies.
TL;DR: Cohen and Tita as mentioned in this paper approached then-editor of JQC Michael Maltz about their idea for a special issue pertaining to the spatial analysis of homicide, which was the right "space" for a collection of articles that employed spatial analysis in an attempt to describe and explain the recent "youth homicide epidemic."
Abstract: During the 1998 ASC Annual Meeting in Washington, DC Jacqueline Cohen and I (George Tita) approached then-editor of JQC Michael Maltz about our idea for a special issue pertaining to the spatial analysis of homicide. Having worked with a number of scholars as part of the National Consortium on Violence Research (NCOVR) "Space and Time" working group, we were convinced that the Journal of Quantitative Criminology was the right "space" for a collection of articles that employed spatial analysis in an attempt to describe and explain the recent "youth homicide epidemic." It was also the right "time"--at the same moment a growing number of scholars began wrestling with explaining the spatial patterns of homicide, especially events involving minority males in urban centers, advances in both desk top mapping solutions (e.g., ESRI's ArcView, MapInfo) and statistical software such as Anselin's SpaceStat were making it much easier to conduct ecological studies of crime and violence. We were thril... Language: en
TL;DR: The term "official records" is broad and would include data taken from any set of administrative records in order to measure crime or features of criminal justice as mentioned in this paper, in practice, it is usually taken to refer to police or court records.
Abstract: What are "Official" RecordsThe term "official records" is broad and would include data taken from any set of administrative records in order to measure crime or features of criminal justice. In practice, it is usually taken to refer to police or court records. For present purposes, we will limit discussion to the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program. This includes the older "Summary Reporting System" with seven different data collections (Offenses Known to the Police also called Return A; Age, Sex and Race of Persons Arrested; Supplementary Homicide Report; Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted; Full-time Law Enforcement Employees; Arson Offenses Known to Law Enforcement; and Hate Crime), as well as the National Incident-Based Reporting System which is currently under development. The term "UCR" is ambiguous. When we refer to the whole organizational enterprise coordinated by the FBI, we use the term "UCR Program," otherwise we will refer to specific data collections. ... Language: en
TL;DR: The most popular form of regression analysis is a structural equation model from which causal e ects can be estimated as discussed by the authors, which has become the dominant statistical paradigm within the social sciences and criminol-ogy.
Abstract: Regression analysis, broadly construed, has over the past 60 years becomethe dominant statistical paradigm within the social sciences and criminol-ogy. In its most canonical and popular form, a regression analysis becomesa \structural equation model" from which \causal e ects" can be estimated.Consider some examples from the two most recent issues of Criminology.Volume 47, Issue 4, has ten articles, seven of which employ some form ofcasual modeling. One exception (Mears and Bales, 2009) estimates causale ects using matching, another exception (Schultz and Tabanico, 2009) esti-mates causal e ects using randomized experiments, and the nal exception(Guerette and Bowers, 2009) estimates causal e ects using meta-analysis.
TL;DR: In this article, the authors identify two empirically distinct superdimensions of segregation (group separateness and centralized concentration) which have a substantial positive and statistically significant impact on homicide victimization for both Blacks and Hispanics.
Abstract: Past research examining the association between residential segregation and homicide victimization has often considered only one dimension of segregation, and the literature that does use a multidimensional approach has not presented a uniform set of findings. The majority of the studies have focused on the experiences of Blacks, while overlooking the possibility that the differences between the structure of Black and Hispanic communities may alter the conclusions for Hispanics. In this study, we argue that in order to understand the mechanisms underlying the effects of segregation on homicide, we need to understand the multidimensional structure of Black and Hispanic segregation, and examine whether the relationship between segregation and homicide differs for Blacks and Hispanics. Using 2000 census data and homicide data from the National Vital Statistics System (1999–2001) for U.S. metropolitan areas, we identify two empirically distinct superdimensions of segregation (group separateness and centralized concentration), both of which have a substantial positive and statistically significant impact on homicide victimization for both Blacks and Hispanics.
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors test whether the timing of the criminal acts of a father is important for children's chances of committing crime, and they show that the timing is indeed very important, but also the exact timing is key to understanding intergenerational transmission of crime.
Abstract: Criminal behavior of parents substantially affects the criminal behavior of children. Little is known, however, about how crime is transmitted from one generation to the next. In order to test two possible explanations against each other, we pose the question whether the timing of the criminal acts of fathers is important for children’s chances of committing crime. Static theories predict that it is the number of delinquent acts performed by fathers that is important, and that the particular timing does not affect the child’s chance of committing crime. Dynamic theories state that the timing is important, and children have a greater chance of committing crime in the period after fathers have committed delinquent acts. Results show that the total number of convictions of a father is indeed very important, but also the exact timing is key to understanding intergenerational transmission of crime. In the year a father is convicted the chance his child is also convicted increases substantially and it decays in subsequent years. This decay takes longer the more crimes father has committed. Our results show that some of the assumptions of the static theories at least need to be adjusted.
TL;DR: This paper examined crime statistics at the National, State, and local level in order to test for conformity to the Benford distribution, and found that National and State-level summary UCR data conform to Benford's law.
Abstract: Benford’s law suggests that the distribution of leading (leftmost) digits in data of an anomalous nature (i.e., without relationship) will conform to a formula of logarithmic intervals known as the Benford distribution. Forensic auditors have successfully used digital analysis vis-a-vis the Benford distribution to detect financial fraud, while government investigators have used a corollary of the distribution (focused on trailing digits) to detect scientific fraud in medical research. This study explored whether crime statistics are Benford distributed. We examined crime statistics at the National, State, and local level in order to test for conformity to the Benford distribution, and found that National- and State-level summary UCR data conform to Benford’s law. When National data were disaggregated by offense type we found varying degrees of conformity, with murder, rape, and robbery indicating less conformity than other offense types. Some tentative implications of these findings are discussed, as are areas for further research.
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors focus on the relationship between crime and place and examine how community-level variables, such as relative deprivation, low socioeconomic status, or lack of economic opportunity may affect individual criminality.
Abstract: For most of the last century criminologists have focused their understanding of crime on individuals and communities (Nettler 1978; Sherman 1995; Weisburd et al. 2009). In the case of individuals, criminologists have sought to understand why certain people as opposed to others become criminals (e.g. see Akers 1973; Gottfredson and Hirschi 1990; Hirschi 1969; Raine 1993), or to explain why certain offenders become involved in criminal activity at different stages of the life course or cease involvement at other stages (e.g., see Moffitt 1993; Sampson and Laub 1993). In the case of communities, criminologists have often tried to explain why certain types of crime or different levels of criminality are found in some communities as contrasted with others (e.g., see Agnew 1999; Bursik and Grasmick 1993; Sampson and Groves 1989; Shaw and McKay 1942) or how community-level variables, such as relative deprivation, low socioeconomic status, or lack of economic opportunity may affect individual criminality (e.g. see Agnew 1992; Cloward and Ohlin 1960; Merton 1938; Wolfgang and Ferracuti 1967). In most cases, research on communities has focused on the ‘‘macro’’ level, often studying states (Loftin and Hill 1974), cities (Baumer et al. 1998), and neighborhoods (Sampson 1985; Bursik and Grasmick 1993). While concern with the relationship between crime and place goes back to the founding generations of modern criminology (Guerry 1833; Quetelet 1842), the ‘‘micro’’ approach to places emerged only in the last few decades (e.g. see Brantingham and Brantingham
Abstract: A quick perusal through the past 25 years of the Journal of Quantitative Criminology provides a convenient summary of the way in which criminologists often describe the status of victimization research. During this period, a relatively small but respectable number of articles (approximately 10-15%) have focused either on the topic of victimization, or have used victim-based data to assess some other criminological issue. This proportion is not inconsistent with other leading journals in the field, but it seems to have suggested to some researchers that study of the causes and consequences of victimization constitutes a relatively small subfield within the field of criminology, and perhaps an unruly subfield as well. In this paper, I briefly discuss the origins of victimization research to show how this view may have come about, and follow by noting just a few of the contributions of victimization data and research and how they have advanced the field of criminology. I contend that the... Language: en
TL;DR: The magnitude and variation in the arrest risk per crime for individual offenders, termed Q,1 are fundamental to any characterization of crime and crime control Obviously, Q has intrinsic value as an indicator of criminal justice performance, as well as a measure of the risk of detection faced by offenders as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: The magnitude and variation in the arrest risk per crime for individual offenders, termed Q,1 are fundamental to any characterization of crime and crime control Obviously, Q has intrinsic value as an indicator of criminal justice performance, as well as a measure of the risk of detection faced by offenders The variation in Q across offenders is also important as a methodological support to enable use of the widely available arrest data to make inferences about offending behavior In particular, knowing Q is vital in attempts to estimate individual crime rates, λ, from such arrest data (Blumstein and Cohen 1979; Cohen 1986)
TL;DR: In this paper, a modified Boudon-Coleman boat diagram is used as a metamodel for organizing the types of links in theories about crime impacts or reactions to crime.
Abstract: Of interest here are theories about the impacts of both community and individual features on individual-level outcomes like victimization, reactions to crime like fear or avoidance, or related perceptions of features of local context such as perceived risk. Relevant community features could be almost anything, depending on the theory: demographic structural dimensions, land use features, reported crime rates, removal or return rates, or features of local social, cultural or political climate. Communities are areas where people live which are smaller than cities and larger than individual address parcels or land uses (Hunter 1979). Spatial communities exist at multiple levels, such as streetblocks within neighborhoods. (Taylor 1997). Crime refers to reported crime rates and self-reported victimization. Reactions to crime include concerns for personal safety such as fear of crime and worries for personal property, and more cognitively-weighted reactions such as perceptions of risk or assessments of crime severities in the locale (Dubow et al. 1979).
A modified Boudon-Coleman “boat” diagram can be used as a metamodel for organizing our understanding of the types of links in theories about crime impacts or reactions to crime. See Fig. 1 (Boudon 1986: 29–31; Bunge 2006; Coleman 1990: 10). Although community attributes and changes are conditioned by broader societal and geographic factors such as de-industrialization (Kasarda 1992; Lane 1997) and suburban expansion (Marshall 1979) for example, the primary conceptual focus is on community-level features and individual-level features and dynamics. The Boudon-Coleman metamodel suggests two links are operative when individual-level outcomes are of interest: context effects of community features (macro-level inputs) on individual attributes (micro-level inputs) (Ma-I → Mi-I), and impacts of individual-level attributes on individual-level outcomes (micro-level outputs) (Mi-I → Mi-O). Of course, if spatially aggregated outcomes are of interest then the final link between individual-level outcomes and community-level outcomes (macro-level outcomes) (Mi-O → Ma-O) becomes relevant as well. This perspective assumes methodological individualism—the behaviors of individuals are key building blocks for social change—but is not tautological when considering aggregated outcomes (Boudon 1986: 53).
Open image in new window
Fig. 1
Meta-model orientation to crime, people, and places
In such a theoretical frame the macro-to-micro and micro-to-macro links hold considerable theoretical interest (Liska 1990). The first tells us about how context shapes individual-level dynamics. The second tells us how agency operates. Methodological individualism is avoided when interpreting the second link since local social processes such as norm formation also shape such dynamics (Boudon 1986: 53; Coleman 1990: 22, 30, 265, 273,599). Even if attention is limited to aggregated individual actions without the concept of interdependencies, non-intuitive collective outcomes can arise (Boudon 1986: 57).
The most central idea in this metatheoretical approach, given the current focus, is as follows: although ecological relationships between macro-level inputs and macro-level outputs can be modeled, understanding such macro-level dynamics (Ma-I → Ma-O) hinges on gaining insight into the constituent links in the chain: Ma-I → Mi-I → Mi-O → Ma-O. The ecological connection depends on the underlying macro → micro → micro → macro processes.
TL;DR: In this article, a procedure for estimating survival models with judges as instruments is discussed. But, the use of instrumental variable estimation is complicated for nonlinear models, and when studying criminal recidivism, researchers often choose to use survival models, which are nonlinear given right-hand-censoring or competing events.
Abstract: Criminal justice researchers often seek to predict criminal recidivism and to estimate treatment effects for community corrections programs. Although random assignment provides a desirable avenue to estimating treatment effects, often estimation must be based on observational data from operating corrections programs. Using observational data raises the risk of selection bias. In the community corrections contexts, researchers can sometimes use judges as instrumental variables. However, the use of instrumental variable estimation is complicated for nonlinear models, and when studying criminal recidivism, researchers often choose to use survival models, which are nonlinear given right-hand-censoring or competing events. This paper discusses a procedure for estimating survival models with judges as instruments. It discusses strengths and weaknesses of this approach and demonstrates some of the estimation properties with a computer simulation. Although this paper’s focus is narrow, its implications are broad. A conclusion argues that instrumental variable estimation is valuable for a broad range of topics both within and outside of criminal justice.
TL;DR: The Journal of Quantitative Criminology (JQC) celebrated its 25th year of publication in 1996 as discussed by the authors, which was the first year of the Journal's existence.
Abstract: I am delighted to be part of the 25th anniversary celebration for the Journal of Quantitative Criminology. Twenty-five years! Where did the time go? I served as Editor of JQC from July 1991 to September 1996, roughly years seven and half through 12 in the 25-year life span. In other words, what life-course researchers call ‘‘late childhood’’. Of course, huge credit must go to James Alan Fox who birthed this journal in 1985 and stayed awake all hours nurturing it through infancy and early and middle childhood. By the time I was on the scene, JQC was walking tall, already accomplished yet with room to grow and flourish as she did. In thinking about what to say in these pages, I decided to go back and reread my ‘‘From the Editor’’ statement for my first volume, #8. At the time, I believed that there was the perception in the field that JQC was an excellent journal, but only interested in publishing papers that employed the most sophisticated, cutting edge statistical techniques available at time. Like most perceptions (misperceptions?), there was some truth to this one. I saw my task as a new Editor to convince the field that the mission of JQC was ‘‘to publish the best empirical research in the field of criminology and criminal justice’’ (1992: 153). I believed then and do so now even more strongly that ‘‘It is far more important... to let the research question dictate the choice of the analytic technique rather than the other way around’’ (1992: 153). This means that in many cases, important research questions can be answered using simple methods. Based on the available evidence, it does appear that I was successful in attracting a wider audience of empirical researchers to JQC during my editorship. During my first year as editor, 75% of the papers we published (excluding the special issue) were ‘‘new authors’’ to JQC. This trend continued in my second year, wherein 83% of the papers were by ‘‘new authors’’. JQC was publishing a larger base of quantitative researchers and in turn JQC was exposed to a wider audience in the field of criminology and criminal justice. Whether this improved the journal and the field at large, I leave to others to assess. During my tenure as editor, I was responsible for five volumes (Volumes 8 through 12) that contained nearly 75 papers and three special issues—the first was on quantitative
TL;DR: For instance, the 25th anniversary of the Journal of the Quarterly Journal of Criminology (JQC) was celebrated by the editors of JQC in 2016 as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: I am honored to have been invited to participate with the editors of JQC to join in the celebration of the 25th anniversary of the Journal I think I got called on because I probably have had the longest opportunity to observe the dramatic growth in bringing quantitative analysis to criminology My involvement started in 1966 when I was invited to lead the Task Force on Science and Technology for the President’s Crime Commission 1 That was quite a challenge for someone who had an undergraduate degree in engineering physics and a PhD in operations research who protested that he knew nothing about crime or criminal justice, but accepted that risky invitation with the assurance that the Commission had lots of people around who had that expertise and could answer any questions That was a golden opportunity to play ‘‘emperor’s clothes’’ and ask any probing questions however nao¨ve, and—little did I realize—launch a new career
TL;DR: The first editor of the Journal of Quantitative Criminology (JQC) as discussed by the authors was the first one to make a contribution to the development of quantitative criminology.
Abstract: By the time I became editor of JQC, it was already a thriving and well-regarded journal. Jamie Fox, John Laub, and Mike Maltz had done the hard work necessary to develop a niche for it within criminology, and to make its presence known to potential contributors. Due to their efforts, it had built up a solid base of readers and had earned a reputation for publishing high-quality scholarship. The editor did not have to worry about finding enough papers to fill issues, and so did not have to think much about the state of quantitative criminology in general. As with other established journals, the major editorial task was to oversee the selection of manuscripts from a pool of mostly sound and innovative submissions. These were very fortunate circumstances for me, and they reflected the significant progress that the field and the journal had made. They nevertheless provided no insights into the development of quantitative criminology, nor any illuminating stories about the role that JQC had played in it. I therefore have nothing original to say about these matters, and I will not try to disguise the fact by reflecting on them. I appreciate, however, the opportunity that the editors have given me to comment on the present state and possible future direction of quantitative criminological research. The remaining sections of this essay will first review the current situation, and will then consider what the field needs and where it may be headed.
TL;DR: The Journal of Quantitative Criminology (JQC) as discussed by the authors was the first journal devoted to quantitative criminology and was published in 1985 by the American Society of Criminologists (ASC).
Abstract: Back in 1903 at Kitty Hawk, North Carolina, brothers Wilber and Orville Wright endured mockery and derision from their fair share of skeptics. ‘‘It will never get off the ground,’’ they said of the Wright Brother’s odd-looking contraption, wishfully named the Flyer. ‘‘Man is not meant to fly,’’ insisted the critics. Of course, history proved the Wright doubters wrong. The same was said back in 1983 about the idea for launching a journal devoted to quantitative criminology, though the story is hardly of legendary significance. A survey of nearly 100 leading criminologists at the time, soliciting their thoughts about the prospects for such an initiative, strongly voiced the opinion that the publication too would never fly. History also has proven them wrong. What a difference a quarter century makes! The discipline of criminology, the existing body of research, and the toolkit of criminological research have changed dramatically since the March 1985 inaugural issue of the Journal of Quantitative Criminology. It wasn’t very long ago that statistical methods were viewed by leaders of the field with a mix of fear and disdain, but now these tools are considered a virtual necessity. And, not that long ago, at the annual meeting of the American Society of Criminology, a prominent scholar who was serving as a panel discussant described statistics as ‘‘the black arts,’’ refusing to comment on one presenter’s paper just because it contained tables, charts and equations. Presently, entire panels at the ASC meetings are devoted to quantitative methods and applications. My remembrances of the early years of the Journal of Quantitative Criminology are distant but distinct. As founding editor through the publication’s fist 7 years, I constantly struggled with a pervasive degree of skepticism about the fledgling journal as well as the constant pressure to fill the quarterly page budget. Not only was I busy with the routine activities of editorship—assigning reviewers and playing referee on split decisions, but much of my time was devoted to recruiting potential contributors and submissions. These were the pre-Internet days, when exposure was a function of the subscription base. The number of institutional subscribers grew, but much too slowly for my comfort
TL;DR: In the early 1970s, Maitz and Waldron as mentioned in this paper trained an OR analyst for the National Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice (now NIJ) to deal with different types of data, for the most part based on random samples, such as National Crime Survey (NCS) and National Crime Victimization Survey (NVCS).
Abstract: Like AI Blumstein, I came to criminology via operations research (OR) and, earlier, via electrical engineering, when I was engaged in designing a radio system for the Boston Police Department (Maitz and Waldron 1968; Maitz 1970). I subsequently became an OR analyst for the National Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice (now NIJ) in 1969. After 3 years of seasoning, I started teaching criminal justice at the University of Illinois at Chicago Circle (now UIC without the Circle1). There I taught inter alia undergraduate and graduate statistics and research methods. Having never taken them, I had to learn them on the fly. But like most engineers, I had a strong background in dealing with data, so it was not too problematic.2 But I brought different ways of looking at data (with an emphasis on the word look). Engineers and most hard scientists are taught to plot the data as they collect them. In physics we added weights to a spring and plotted the spring's length against the applied weight; we dropped an object and plotted the time it takes to fall different distances. It is through such exercises that we were able to demonstrate the linear relationship in the first example and the quadratic relationship in the second. In becoming a criminologist, however, I found that I had to deal with different types of data, for the most part based on random samples. The National Crime Survey (NCS), and its successor, the National Crime Victimization Survey (NVCS), were based on samples, as were a number of other important data sets. I set out to learn the methods of dealing with